Ponderings on the Futures Library: What is the status of Anthony Williams' submission of the futures library to the c++ standards committee? Is it more prudent to wait to find out what the c++ standards committe is going to do first, before adding a possibly incompatible version of the futures library to boost? One could ask, if Anthony's submission is approved by the c++ standards committe, what is the point of adding a "futures" library to boost as well? Is a seperate library needed? What is the advantage of having a root level library called boost::futures? Why would it not be perferable to just extend boost::thread with the additional capabiltity to handle "futures"? Futures are a very useful concept, and I have used them personally. The c++ commitee is correctly considering adding them to the standard. I would be interested in hearing the authors views on their "grand" vision for parallel programming in general and how their "futures" library submissions fit into this vision. tom brinkman